Reading Rogelio Cerda’s sister’s blog

I’ve spent some time going over Rogelio Cerda‘s sister’s blog about her missing brother, which has a lot of information about him and pictures that I plan to add to his casefile. She believes he didn’t drown the day he disappeared in 1975 and he might have run away and might still be alive. I’m torn between thinking she’s being a tad overoptimistic and thinking there just might be something to her theory. There were a lot of reported sightings of Rogelio in the local area after his disappearance — sightings by people who knew him — and a lot of strange phone calls to the family. At least, I’m going to change his category from “Lost/Injured Missing” to “Endangered Missing.”

According to his sister, his birth name is actually Jesus Rogelio Realme Cerda, though apparently nobody called him Jesus at all: it was either Rogelio or Roger or Junior (since their father was also called Rogelio). He attended Catholic high schools in San Antonio and was an about-to-be sophomore when he disappeared.

Whether Rogelio left intentionally or not, his disappearance had a devastating effect on the family. His father took his own life less than two years later, and I’m sure the disappearance and/or death of his only son contributed to that.

Hmm…I wonder…

Constance Ann Streif is at present one of my “few details are available” case. However, some blog commenter sent me a link to this legal decision issued by a New York court (a decision which, incidentally, mentions the Charley Project in passing) that provides a little bit more: she was adopted, and she was in Texas visiting her sister from out of state when she disappeared.

In summary, as the court decision explains, Constance’s father died of asbestos-related mesothelioma in 2011. His will specifically disinherited Constance because she hadn’t been in touch in almost 30 years and he believed she was dead. There was a settlement for wrongful death, though, which in theory was supposed to be divided among his three children; that is, Constance and her two sisters. The sisters petitioned the court to change that because Constance was dead. They wanted the settlement to be divided by two, not three, and they wanted Constance declared legally dead. The judge ruled that Constance could not be declared legally dead, but that she shouldn’t benefit from the settlement anyway because she hadn’t been in touch with her father for so long before he vanished and so his wrongful death was no loss to her in any case.

What interests me, though, is this 2014 law journal article I found about the case. (The article is on page 16.) It says, “The decedent’s daughter, Constance Ann Streif, whose last whereabouts were in Texas, had not been heard from since 1992; she had not had contact with the decedent since 1981.”

From what they and that court judgment are saying, it sounds as if Constance last had contact with her father in 1981, visited her sister in Texas in 1982, dropped out of sight and then contacted someone in 1992 before dropping out of sight again — which would mean she was still alive for at least about a decade after her disappearance was reported in 1982. However, it seems equally likely to me that the 1992 date in that article is a misprint for 1982 and therefore no one has seen OR heard from Constance since that visit to her sister.

I wish I knew for sure. I would welcome feedback (in the form of a comment on this entry, or an email) from anyone who knew Constance or is part of her family.

Make-a-List Monday: Full scholarships

This list is for MPs who got full scholarships to college before they disappeared — whether they accepted said scholarships or not. I got a partial scholarship to attend Hendrix College. I forget how much it was, something like $4,500 a semester I think. Nothing terribly impressive; I was a pretty average applicant and I think just about everyone who attended got some kind of scholarship.

(For my non-American readers, a crash course in American colleges/universities’ financial aid system: a scholarship is financial aid a student is given based on merit, usually either academically or in sports or sometimes for some special talent in another area, such as music. Some are granted by the colleges/universities themselves, and others by private foundations and charities. The scholarship is often renewable each year and is usually conditional; that is, to keep getting it renewed a student must attend the college/university full time and keep up a certain GPA, or keep playing on the sports team, or whatever, depending on the nature of the scholarship. Some scholarships are only for students with certain majors, and if they change majors they lose their scholarship.

There are other forms of financial aid, called “grants” and “student loans”, that are given based on financial need. These are not conditional; you can keep getting them renewed as long as you are not flunking out of school. Student loans are much more common than grants and most students graduate tens of thousands of dollars in debt. This has been a growing problem in the United States and everyone is arguing over what to do about it. I have some ideas but they are neither here nor there.)

Anyway, the list of superior scholars:

1. Stevie Danielle Bates for the University of Arizona (she didn’t take it, preferring to enroll at Hunter College instead)
2. Michelle D. Crawford for Cameron University
3. Ian Hunter Burnet for Virginia Commonwealth University
4. LaQuanta Nichelle Riley for an unspecified school
5. Jennifer Marie Wilmer for St. John’s University
   
6. Amber Lynn Wilde for the University of Wisconsin at Green Bay

This list may be incomplete. I’ve got several other MPs where it was mentioned they were in college on a scholarship but I don’t know whether they got a full ride (that is, everything paid for) or just a partial scholarship like me.